Talk:Macedonia

This page seems way too large for such a narrow topic - and most of the quotes do not seem to be very pithy or memorable, but rather read like an encyclopedic entry trying to explore the history of the people from this region. I would think that it should be trimmed at the least, and I'm not sure that it shouldn't be deleted altogether. ~ UDScott 18:07, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

It seems to be not so much an encyclopedic entry as an appendix to Wikipedia, created as an extended bibliographic reference for the several encyclopedic articles treating related topics. In my not so humble opinion: Wikiquote is not an appendix to Wikipedia, and ought not be treated as an overflow bin for reference materials that do not fit an encyclopedic summary style. Almost anything can be "quoted" for some documentary purpose in some context. But in the context of Wikiquote's purpose what matters is "quotability", a quality that is not directly related to utility for documentary purposes. (I have been thinking for some time about writing an essay on "The Documentary Hypothesis — A Common Fallacy.")

Therefore, I agree that it ought to be trimmed to just the quotable quotes, if any, or deleted, if not. Due to the preposterous length of the article, I can't tell if there is anything here worth keeping because I can't bring myself to wade through all of it. ~ Ningauble 19:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

want useless article with preposterous length? see > there are many of them. and this here is not one of them. --CuteHappyBrute 23:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that such articles are largely pointless, but this is not the same sort of topic. We would do well to treat cultural theme pages better than we treat childish entertainments. ~ Ningauble 15:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

When I look to the right side of the screen of the Macedonia page and see how small the scroll bar is, I immediately hit the back button because there is no way I am going to spend that much time reading through hundreds of quotes that are probably boring and not notable. I would imagine that this is what many other people do, as well. This article needs to be greatly shortened. We can start by deleting all of the 'rich material' under the 'On the Republic of Macedonia's history' and 'On modern Macedonian language' sections that showcase the annoyingly obsessive POV of a particular user. Local hero 01:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

oh. scholars' quotes are pov now? and all of them towards one specific pov? whatever. if the small bar scares you, don't read Macedonia. nor Red vs. Blue. Read something like that with the big bar and everybody's happy. I've read all of this article and i still find it interesting. How can you choose something to cut off? based on your biased lack of interest? or your biased ethnicity? that wouldn't work right. --CuteHappyBrute 12:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, all of them point toward one POV. Do any of them say that ethnic Macedonians are a distinct ethnic group that speak a distinct language? No, none of them do because the main contributor to this page doesn't want people to think that. He wants the reader to think that ethnic Macedonians are confused Serbo-Bulgarians that were brainwashed by Josip Broz Tito. I must give you credit, however, for being able to read the entire thing and live to tell the story. If I, as a biased Macedonian, can't decide would should be cut out, then why should you and User:Macedonian, as biased Greeks, decide what should go in?

Greek epigraphic monuments created before definitive Roman domination of our area are to be found in modest quantity.

I picked this quote out randomly. I'm not sure about you, but this one didn't exactly keep me on the edge of my seat. It's quotes like these that I would cut out. --Local heroT 20:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia never said "ethnic Macedonians are confused Serbo-Bulgarians that were brainwashed by Josip Broz Tito", that's up to the reader to decide. although not very far from the truth if you know anything about Comintern linguistics. Wikipedia and here, Wikiquote just give quotes. Notable and quotable. about the random quote you chose and brought as an example of "bad pov quote that needs to be deleted": did you see that it is a quote from a book called "Hellenistic Monuments in S.R.Macedonia" that was written and published by ethnic Macedonians? or do you claim it is a fake quote or a fake book? there is a massive amount of quotes and a plethora of people that said them. Ancient Greeks, modern Greeks, ethnic Macedonians (politicians, historians, archaeologists) , Bulgarians, Serbians, various scholars, Americans, Germans, Brits etc. all of them are against your glorious nation? they woke up one day and decided to be against a poor province of Yugoslavia? have you ever thought that it is your perception and your wanting to see things differently that is the reason why all those people are "against" you? ... Wikipedia for one, makesitclearanyway >:"This article is about the language of Ancient Macedonians; for the unrelated South Slavic language, see Macedonian language" . it's not like this wikiquote presents something new to Wikipedia. it just gives quotes to liven things up... to conclude, you have no right to delete quotes just because they are against your pov. there are things in wp that are against my pov, but if decent scholars believe them, there must be space for them, even if they're fringe theories, while taking care of course undue weight.. --CuteHappyBrute 22:48, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I, for one, could care less about who makes what claims about the political/sociological status of Macedonia, and am therefore free of bias. I will chop away at this page based on quote quality alone. BD2412T 23:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is up to the reader to decide, but the types of quotes that are presented in certain sections would lead the reader to think that way. I didn't pick that quote as an example of bad POV, I picked it out because it's not interesting. Also, I never said these quotes were fake. And I don't mind keeping the Greek POV quotes because many think that way, but I think we should also present other POVs. I don't think everyone is against Macedonia. How could Greece be against them if they are the number one foreign investors in the country? I personally think the only ones hurting the country are the ultra-nationalists that run the government. And I haven't deleted any quotes at all, I just think that the page needs to be shortened and it looks like BD2412 is taking care of that. --Local heroT 00:20, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Starting to, at any rate. I've chopped about a fifth of it, I think. BD2412T 01:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

do you really believe you are producing some kind of work by making the article smaller? or making the article obey some kind of law? ...if you don't like the article don't read it. Don't ruin it for the people interested in it just because you're not. use common sense please. --CuteHappyBrute 00:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

This page still requires extensive trimming - there are still entirely too many quotes (and most are not memorable in any way). Due to the recent edit-warring, I have semi-protected the page for a couple of weeks. But there remains a lot of work that is needed. ~ UDScott 20:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree that most of this verbiage lacks quotability, and endorse protecting the article from the recently resurgent edit-war. ~ Ningauble 15:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

This page provides quotes biased towards one point of view (and by the use of bold it doesn't even hide its intentions). I fear it has practically become a source of nationalist viewpoints and it cannot exist in this current form. Either it should edited heavily or simply deleted. 80.78.72.196 14:54, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Or, someone could add serious quotes about the other point of view, there should be some. If not, then the page is fine. Λίνουξ (talk) 12:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)